The Sun. — London, England, 1836-07-27 00:00:00

IMPER. AMEN T by the Scotch Parliament, sanctioned by the English Par liament, and there were various Acts confirming to them the same advantages which the English Church had. It was not independent, in as far as—and when the Right Hon. Baronet talked about rendering to Caesar what was Ctesar's, he should recollect that the Scotch Church came to that House begging—that they had voted to it at one time 50,0001., and that they voted annually about 15,0001. It was, therefore, in some measure maintained out of the public money, and though the King was not the Head of the Church in Scotland as he was in England, yet his Commissioner was.—(Cries of " No.") The King's repre sentative superintended and sat during the whole time of the business, and he apprehended that any Scotch sub ject who found himself oppressed, and interfered with by this religious establishment, and his civil and political duties interfered with, he thought that if there was any ground of complaint brou g ht t o th a t H ouse b y an E ng li s h subject against an English Church, the same ought to hold good against the Church of Scotland. This gentleman had been raised by his townsmen to the office of Magistrate—he had, at their request, presided at a political meeting, and for this the Presbytery interfered with him. He did not offend against the discipline of the Church, and lie I must say that the interference of the Presbytery was an unconstitutional interference of the vilest kind.—(Hear.) He considered that the petitioner was perfectly justified in laying his complaint before that House. If that House interfered so far with the Church of Scotland as to add to its strength by supplying it with money—if there were annual grants to continue that support—he hoped that when a subject was attempted to be deprived of his civil rights by a clerical tribunal, he thought it a fit subject of complaint for the House to entertain. He hoped that the House that day wou ld not reject his petition which was worded with great propriety. He sub mitted to the House that there was nothing in the petition to prevent its complaint from being brought before that House. It would be another question, if the petition proposed as a remedy that they should interfere with the Presbytery and Synod—if it stepped out of the way for the purpose of proposing a remedy against simila r e ff ec t s in future, that wou ld be a question on which a diffe rence of opinion might reasonably exist.—(Hear, hear.) He hoped that no subject would ever be precluded from laying his complaint before the House, if it was couched in respectful language, and he trusted the House would consider that the petition ought to be received. Mr. FOX MAULE said that with regard to the reception of the petition, and its being laid on the table, that was a question for the consideration of the House ; but with regard to the interference of - the - HOuse, he must deny the right of that House to interfere with the regulations of the Scotch Church. He would put it to his Honourable and Learned Friend whether, when the House had no right to interfere in affording a remedy, he would persist in presenting the petition. If the Honourable Gentleman's object were to call the attention of the public to the matter, he thought that object was already gained, and therefore he would recom mend him to withdr aw th e p e titi on . ' Dr. BOWRING did not think the petition had been rightly understood ; but, nevertheless, if the Speaker thought that, under the circumstances of the case, he ought not to press the petition before the House, he would with draw it. Mr. PRINGLE, as a Scotch Member, could not remain silent after the confusion of ideas that bad been poured forth from the opposite side. Circumstances occurred which had drawn down the reprehension of the Church of Scotland upon the petitioner. The matter had been inves tigated before the only tribunal competent to do so ; and they were of opinion that he had acted inconsistently with his spiritual character as an elder. Whether the petitioner continued to be an elder or an officer of that Church or not, was not a question with which any external authority could interfere. In her internal discipline, and the duty of her officers, and in her spiritual authority and jurisdiction, the Church of Scotland was per fectly independent. That independence bad been re cognized by various acts of the Legislature, and as the King's Commissioner presided over the General Assembly, he could not interfere with the acts of that body. Mr. C. FERGUSSON contended that the House had no power to take the subject matter into consideration, be cause they could not afford redress. He would go further, and say that it was impossible that the petitioner could have been retained in his situation of elder, which was a spiritual one, after the conduct of which he had been guilty. He had presided at a meeting which passed resolutions, saying that there ought to be no con nection between the Church and State ; he concurred in those views, and therefore, as he wished to destroy the Church of Scotland, he could not with safety be retained one of its officers. He did not think, that, under the cir cumstances, the petitioner had any grievance to complain of. Mr. O'CONNELL—The Hon. and Learned Member had said that this was a spiritual affair, and that therefore the House could not interfere. If the argument was car ried out to its full extent then he fully agreed with it, for it went to say that the State had nothing to do with the Church—that was the only ground upon which Hon. Mem bers had said that the House could not interfere in this case. He could comprehend the argument of the Hon. Gentlemen opposite, and below him, if they would support a separation HOUSE OF COMMONS, J ULY 26. between th e Ch urc h an d S tate . All t h at h i s friend Bailie A ballot on th e M er i onet Craig had d one , was t o a d vocate t h e same pr i nciple. He h Election petiti on was fi xe d for (Mr. O'C onne ll) wou ld put t h e case of a clergyman who this day, but the p e titi oners not h av i ng entere d i nto t h e ne- was deprived of his benefice for being a Tory. Was there cessary recognizances, the ballot did not take place, and the anything spiritual in being a Tory P—lie thought the least Speaker took the Chair at the usual hour. in the world.—(Laughter.) Yet would the Hon. Gentle- LEITH PIER BILL. men then argue as they do now. It was always the case The LORD ADVOCATE mov e d f or leave to bring in when a spiritual court took up a temporal case—they let in a Bill for the purpose of erecting a pier at Leith. the House to jurisdiction. The petitioner presided Sir G. CLERK would not offer any opposition to the as a magistrate over a public meeting which was held motion of the Lord Advocate. by his townsmen ; and for so doing, he was displaced After a few words from Mr. HUME, leave was given from a situation of honour in his Church. Why, upon the to bring in the Bill, which was read a first time, same principle, e ver y s i gner o f a pet i t i on to that House the Trinity H ar b our Bill. The LO RD ADVOCATE presented a petiti on against would suffer the s a m e p un i s h men t, if i t was upon the same SCOTCH CHURCH. subject. Ther e b e i ng suc h monstrous propos i t i ons brought forward, he should most certainly vote for the laying of the Dr. BOWRING rose to present a petition of which be petition on the table, though no person was more convinced had given notice, inasmuch as it contained allegations . than he was that the House ought not to interfere in spi against the authorities of the Church of Scotland. It was ritual matters. from an individual named Hugh Crai g , who was an e ld er o f Sir JAMES GRAHAM said, that in everything the Church, an d i n 18 34 was called upon to preside at a connected with Church government in Scotland, the public meeting, at which the unio n betwee n Church and oath of the King at his coronation was , th a t h e would The petitioner h a d app li e d to t h e State was cond emne d . Wi th i n twenty-four hours he re- not interfere. ceived no ti ce f rom the authorities of the Church with supreme power, and th a t p ower h a d d ec id e d aga i nst him. whichder himself ppealed to had fought, bled, and conquered—(Cheers)—and it would the Presbytery of Irvine, and to the Synod of Glasgow be hard, indeed, if the House now attempted to deprive and Ayr, but still he rem a i ne d dep ose d, a n d h e complained them of that independence.—(Cheers.) The Hon. and that in his person the right s o f j us ti ce h a d be en violated, Learned Member for Kilkenny had talked about the elders he not having been served with notice of the offence with which he stood c h ar and youngers—(H ear )—by w hi c h, as h e (Si r J . G raham) ged. The petitioner alleged that he thought he intended to cast a slur upon the Scotch had acted magisterially and ministerially at the meeting in Church.—(Hear, hear.) Now, in answer to that, he would question. He had not suffer e d i n hi s pol i tical status, as his say that there was nothing the Scotch thought so much of fellow-citi zens of Kilmarnock had agai n and again elected as their independence in Church Government. He was him to the o ffice of Bailie. He had, however, been con- for the complete maintenance of that independence in demned unheard, both in the Presbytery and in the As- Church Government in Scotland ; and if the Hon. Mem sembly, so that in his case the great principles ofjustice had ber f been violated, so th a t h e h a d b een driven from the Church should be compelled orced the to vote against question to a di v i s i on , h e him. to whi c h h e was s i ncere l y attac h ed, as having been brought Mr. O'NELL could the Right up in it f rom hi s yout h . H e prayed that the House would ronet that, in CON what he had said, assure he meant not the on slight afford such redress as they thought fit. Sir G. CLERK was sorry that i t was his duty to o est disrespect t o any o f t h e mem b ers o f t h e S cotc h Church. oppose Mr. hoped that his Hon. Friend wou not the re cep ti on o f t hi s petition. He was anxious to open the withdraw the HUME petition, but would insist upon its bein g laid portals of the House to petitioners as wide as possible ; but on the table. it would not be for the convenience of the House to receive Mr. POTTER said if the Church of Scotland was co petitions, to which it was not possible for them to afford any spiritual and so independent, why did it come to the House redress. But on this occasion he took higher ground—he and ask for grants of money? denied the authority of the House to do anything in the e of te EXER could matter at a ll—h e d en i e d that it had any power in the case. notT choncede to the pre CHANCELLOR -eminenc h e of the CHEQ Scotc U h Church The Church of Scotland did not admit of the interference wheel they chose to misapply their spiritual functions of any civil power in matters regarding the internal admi- for tire purpose of averting a temporal wrong. In nistration of the Church. Suc was its claim of right the present case it was admitted that there had been a granted by William the Third, and such its claim granted spiritual power exercised in a matter in which the House by the Scotch Parliament in the Act of Union. They ought not to interfere. It was the habit of the House were ll ready to admit the interference of the civil magistrates every day, whether for good or evil purposes, to receive ma cases where he had the right to interfere ; they were petitions that could lead to no result.—(Hear, hear.) ready to render to " Caesar the things that were Caesar's It was only the other day they had a long discussion but they were not ready to allow their right to interfere in upon a petition presented by the Hon. Member for Brid awny th ing h connected with the discipline of their Church. port, relative to the Troutbeck property, which petition h? e would ask, were the more proper judges of the sought to interfere with the decision of a court of law partiessto hol d office in the Church of Scotland than the and he (Mr. Spring Rice) might have objected to it on that Church itself ? . .He would not enter into the merits of the ground, but if the petition was respectfully worded, it was case of the petitioner ;he knew nothing of the meeting that the duty of a Member to present it, though the House had taken place ;but he understood that circumstances had might not have the power to grant the relief it prayed. taken place there which the Church of Scotland had dis- It was a matter of appeal to t the discretion of the Members approved of, and which they felt called upon to depre- of the House. The present was perfectly analo cate. Now what was the case of the petitioner gous to the case the other day, and as its pre- Why it was such as the Church of Scotland had provided sentation could lead to no sesult, he would suggest to the Hon. a remedy for, the petitioner had applied to the tribunal Member the propriety of withdrawing it. If, however, the that was to grant that remedy, and that tribunal had de- Hon. Member persevered in his motion, he (the Chancellor tided against him ; he was not satisfied with that, but had of the Exchequer) would feel it his duty to support the again applied to the General Assembly, who had again petition, it being respectfully worded, and not at variance decided against him. How, therefore, he would ask, with the rules of the House. could th e H ouse i n t er f ere , th e petitioner having been de- Sir G. CLERK explained. He should feel it his duty posed b y th ose persons who were alone entitled to to persevere in his opp osition to the reception of the petition. judge whether he was a competent o ffi cer or not. Mr. CLAY, after what had passed, would certainly This q uestion re l ated ent i rely to Church discipline ; and recommend his Hon. Friend not to withdraw the petition. on th at ground he would certai n ly, if he stood alone, resist He cont en d e d th a t Parliam en t had thepowerto interfere with the reception of this petition. - the i n t ernal discipline and conduct of the Church of Scotland. Mr. HUME take these said th a t t h e H on. Baronet would have Mr. GOULB URN would so far concur with the Chan had a ri g ht to objections, if the Church of cellor of the Exchequer. to recommend the Hon... Mem- Scotland had been like the Catholic Church of Ireland, ber to withdraw t h e petition. If, however, the petition was not tinder the laws and regulations of this country. But pressed, he should oppose it, because he thought the prac this was not the case ; and therefore the ground on which tier of receiving petitions on which the House could give the petition respecting the discipline of the Catholic Church no redress was most injudicious. was rejected did not occur here. They had a right to Dr. BOWRING said that the petitioner's object had petition against the discipline of the English Chu rc h, an d now nearly been obtained, and under all the circumstances the §cotch Church was as much under the protection ofof the case he would withdraw the petition.—( Hear, hear.) 'drat`-use as the English Church. The Right Ho- The Petition was then withdrawn. ' LI 12..._ Otltavie `asurenet (Sir G. Clerk) said they had no BRIGHTON RAILWAY. , e/ / , 1 , , ,-kight to,;'?ec . eitie such a petition ; but he asked him Mr. HUME then rose to present a petition from the ni p ether . th entrvh of Scotland had not been agreed to proprietors of Cundy's Line of Railroad to Brighton. ( ....„,:- ..r ti ri• .- .1 71,),-..- ROUSE OF LORDS, Juzr 26. The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the Woolsack at five o'clock. MESSAGE FROM THE COMMONS. Mr. BERNAL, and other Members from the House of Commons, brought up the Court of Exchequer (Scot land) Bill, the Established Church Bill, the Stamp Duties on Newspapers Bill, and the Greenwich Pier Bill, which were severally read a first time. LIGHT HOUSES BILL. Lord DUNCANNON moved the order of the day for the House resolving itself into a Committee on this Bill. The Duke of WELLINGTON presented a petition from the guardians of a minor int eres t e d i n a Li g h t -h ouse , p ra ying for compensation if the Bill should pass. Lord LYNDHURST had a petition to present from a Gentleman of the name of William Cope, in the county of Essex, stating that by letters patent, of the date of the reign of Charles the Second, the light house of Teignmouth, in the county of Northumber land, was, for the consideration therein mentioned, in vested with the privilege of taking certain tolls and dues granted to the patentees. The present petitioner de duced his title from the original grantees, and by an Act of the 42 Geo. 111. certain alterations were directed to be made in this light-house, and, in consideration of the petitioner making the required alterations at his own expense, certain additional dues were granted to him as an equivalent for the money he had expended. He stated, that by this Bill his property in this light-house was taken away from him without any compensation. The Earl of SHAFTESBURY said that the Bill pro vided compensation. Lord LYNDHURST—By whom is it to be assessed ? The Earl of SHAFTESBURY—By a jury, in the usual manner. Lord DUNCANNON read the clause of the Act, which provided that when the parties did not agree as to the amount of compensation, it should be decided by the award of a jury, summoned in the usual manner. Lord LYNDHURST suggested the propriety of post poning the Bill for the present, until they should have had an opportunity of seeing what its effect was likely to be. The Bill was accordingly postponed. EXCISE LICENSES BILL. On the motion of Lord DUNCANNON, this Bill was read a third time. EDINBURGH POOR RATES. Lord HATHER.TON moved the second reading of this Bill. The Earl of [IA DDINGTON opposed the Bill. It contemplated a violent invasion of the rights of pro perty, without the consent of the parties. It was unjust and unreasonable, and on these grounds he would move that the Bill be read a second time that day six months. The Earl of MINTO thought that he could ga ther, from what had fallen from the Noble Earl, that the Bill could not be resisted upon principle. Unless this Bill passed there would be no fund available as a provision for the poor of Edinburgh, except what was ob tained by voluntary contributions. He hoped that this Bill, which was both just and reasonable, would be read a second time. The Earl of ROSSLYN thought the Bill was a most ucjustifiable interference with private property, and he would therefore oppose it. He hoped the Noble Lord (Hatherton) would consent to postpone it till next Session. Lord H ATHERTON said that he thought it a moilstrous' injustice that the College of Justice of Edin burgh, which comprised one-fourth of the property of that town, should be exempt from the floor rates. As, however, he saw no chance of carrying the Bill against the opposition of the Noble Lords opposite, he would let it rest till next Session. The Bill was then ordered to be read a second time this day three months. ESTABLISHED CHURCH BILL. On the motion of Lord MELBOURNE, this Bill was read a.first time, and ordered to be real a second time on Friday next. CHURCH RATES. Lord HOLLAND presented a petition from the Dis senters of Chatham against Church-rates. FOREIGN CONSULS. Lord MELBOURNE rose to move the second read ing of the Bill, which had come up from the other House, for the better regulation of our Consular establishments in the Ottoman dominions and the Levant. The Bill was founded upon the recommendations of a Se lect Committee of the other House of Parliament, which reported that our present system for the regulation of fo reign Consulships was in many respects defective. After some observations from the Duke of WELLING TON, the Bill was read a second time. IRISH CHURCH BILL. The Earl of SHAFTESBURY brought up the Report of the Committee on this Bill. The Third readint , of the Irish Tithe Bill was fixed on Thursday next, on the motion of Lord LYNDHURST. The Insolvent Debtor's Bill went through Committee, and the other Bills having been advanced a stage, the House adjourned. ads. THE SUN, I,OiNIDON, WEbIsTESDAY, JULY .2 1 , 1836. Mr. ROBINSON wished to postpone a petition— (Loud cries of " Mr. Hume," and " Chair, chair.") The SPEAKER said the hour of public business had now arrived, and he had not intended to call the name of any other Gentleman for private business. Mr. HUME was aware of that, and would not have risen had it not been that his petition involved the character of a Member of the House.—(Hear, hear.) The petition was from six proprietors of Mr. Cundy's line. He believed that all the procedings had been irregular, and that what he was about to say was also so ; but so much having been done, the House was bound to afford some other opportunities to the parties concerned for vindication. The petitioners stated that when their line was brought out, their secretary received a letter from Sir C. Burrell, on the part of the Beveridge Navigation, asking if the Company were prepared to buy their interest in the Navigation, for if not, they would oppose them before Parliament. Stephenson's Line afterwards came out, and then it was found that Sir Charles was one of its most strenuous supporters, though not one word was said about the purchase of the Navigation in question. They therefore prayed for an inquiry, in order to find what promises had been made to Sir C. Burrell, or any other, on his behalf. With respect to the individual who had been brought to the bar, and with respect to whom there was a great difference of opinion, he was informed, that from con fusion he had been unable to express himself, and that he was prepared to state that before a Committee of the House, and many other facts relating to railways which it would be important to know. He (Mr. Hume) would leave it to the House when they should hear the Honourable Baronet's explanation, to decide how far they thought the matter would be worth their further attention. Sir C. BURRELL was glad to have that opportunity of making some explanation with regard to himself.— (Hear, hear.) As to the canal in question, which he had been described as the chief owner of, that was a gross misrepresent a ti on . H e cou ld on l y say f or himself, that in the proceedings he had take n , h e h a d never soug h t any advantage 'whatever.—(Hear.) He was able to offer to the House the evidence of a most respectable individual relative to his conduct and transactions in this matter, and if it was the wish of the Members of the House to hear that evidence, the Gentleman was ready to give it at the Bar of the House.—(Hear.) Mr. Cundy had called upon him (Sir C. Burrell), and stated it was his intention to project a railway from Shoreham to Brighton, when he asked Mr. Cundy to show him the line, stating that he was one of the trustees of a canal through which he was afraid the line would pass, and was bound by his oath as a trustee to preserve the canal. Mr. Cundy showed him the line, when he stated it would be objected to by the trustees. His answer was, "we will buy your works of you."--(Hear, hear.) He said, that as to money he did not want money, that he re presented the greater part of the monied interest in Man chester, who were only anxious to get their capital employed.—(Hear, hear.) The allegations that were now made against him were made upon a totally dif ferent ground than the allegations of the Honourable Member ; there he was distinctly charged with having made an offer with regard to his own property, for the purpose of protecting his own interests. Now he would state posi tively that although the proposed measure would do him the greatest injury, he had made no terms with any one, but had left it to arbitration. He believed he had done only that which it was his duty as a Member of that House to do and he was convinced, upon the examination before the Committee, that Stephenson's line was the best one. As to Mr. Cundy's line, it was a downright farce. The Hon. Member here referred to clause 67, of the Bill, which authorised the Railway Company to purchase land from the Basingstoke Canal Company, and contended that having acted on behalf and as the trustee of another Company, he had done nothing inconsistent with his character or honour as a Member of Parliament, and he boldly and fearlessly submitted himself to the decision of the House.—(Loud cheers.) The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER only regretted, upon the satisfactory explanation of the matter afforded by the letter, that the Hon. Member would have attached any personal importance to it.—( Hear.) The Hon. Baronet, it appeared by the letter, had acted merely as the trustee of the Beveridge Navigation Com pany, and had felt it his duty to demand compensation on their behalf. It would have been unjustifiable in him to have allowed the rights of that Company to be compromised. Mr. DENISON had known the Hon. Baronet ever since his youth, and from that knowledge he was firmly of opinion that there was not one word of truth in the allega tions of the petition. He would only further say, that he thought the constitution of Committees on private bills was very bad. In his opinion they ought to be assi milated is election Committees—taking evidence on oath, and adjourning if all the Members were not present.-- (Hear, hear.) Mr. GORING was at first, alonc , with his Hon. Col league (Sir C. Bu rre ll), i n f avour of Cundy's Line ; but his conuct was so bad that no faith could be put in a word he said. He had a letter in his hand, which showed the manner in which he tried to obtain his (Mr. Goring's) con, stituents to write to him. Mr. HUME rose to order. He had not said a word in presentinc , the petition, because all the parties were not before them. The line would be best settled by the respective Committees. He supposed the letter alluded to the line. Mr. GORING said this letter was with reference to the transaction.—(Hear, hear.) It was dated February, 1834. Afterwards several gentlemen, who had been on Mr. Cun dy's Committee, withdrew their - names from it. Nearly every person in Shoreham had presented a petition in favour of Stephenson's line ; he himself had pre sented a petition, signed by 320 individuals, in favour of Stephenson's line ; and, under these circum stances, he thought that he and his Hon. Colleague had had very good reason for pursuing the course they had taken.—( Hear, hear.) Sir GEORGE STRICKLAND thought it was time the House should put an end to the subject, by say ing the Hon. Baronet had not done anythin g c , derogatory to his ch arac t er as a M em b er of the House. But matters had been gone into by which great injustice had been done to an individual, who had been dragged before the House once, and would not be allowed to answer the charges that had been wade against him. Sir R. PEEL thought that a dangerous precedent would be established if allegations which were found to be un founded were allowed to be made as to the motives of Mem bers of that House. Mr. HUME begged to remind the Right Hon. Baronet that the circumstances referred to in the petition arose out of a former transaction, and were not brought forward for the purpose of inculpating any Hon. Member of that House. Mr. P. THOMSON thought the petition a mere at tempt to bolster up a case which had failed to be made out before the House, and hoped it would not be received. The House would do best, in his opinion, by putting an end to the matter. Mr. WARBURTON hoped his Hon. Friend would withdraw the petition. Mr. HUME consented to do so, in compliance with what appeared to be the general wish of the House. ATTACK ON FONTARABIA. Mr. MACLEAN begged to know whether the Hon. Gentleman opposite would have any objection to inform him of the number of seamen employed under the order of Lord John Hay, on the coast of Spain, the number engaged in the attack at Fontarabia, and the number of killed and wounded. Mr. C. WOOD begged to know which of the questions be meant to ask ? Mr. MACLEAN begged to know the number of men em ployed under Lord John Hay ? Mr. C. WOOD could not give the Hon. Gentleman the requisite information. Mr. .MACLEAN—Then I am to understand that the Hon. M. ;tuber refuses to give the country the necessary in formation on this point.—(Loud cries of Hear, from the Oppositio n Benches.) In ansv ver to a question from Mr. PRAED, Lord ..14 DHN RUSSELL said that circulars relative to the registr•ation of voters bad been sent to some of the overseers. a,fter the passing of the Reform Bill, whch were inconsistent with the provisions of the Act. CHARITABLE TRUSTS. The H :ouse then went into Committee on the Charitable Trusts B ill, Mr. Bernal in the chair. On cl, ause 3, Mr. 1 , ' INTHROP PRAED moved that all freemen in Corporl ite towns have the right of voting jointly with the burgesses- He did not think the system of popular election for charita: ble trustees was, or could be made good ; but if it was to be carried into effect, he saw no reason why the freemen sh, 3uld be excluded. Mr. V. ;MITH opposed the amendment, which he did not think ( iame well from the Hon. Member. The free- men were fr equently the recipients of the charities, and they, of course, v were the very worst in whose hands the election of trustees s would be placed. Mr. WI LLIAMS would support the motion of the Hon. Stemb •er opposite (Mr. Praed). He considered that freemen we re justly entitled to have some control in the man; kgel molt of their property.—(Hear, hear, hear.) Mr. S , C A .RLETT objected to the principle of popular election gether in the case of Charitable Funds, and consider those fu 3 a. that freemen alone ought to have control over Mr. J SIA.CLEAN supported the motion. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL was opposed, on the ground, amongst many others, that such a change would re quire di Eferent machinery from that which existed at present. Mr. HUME was inclined to support the clause as it stood at `. present. Sir E L. PEEL said there existed at present a freeman's roll, am. ( 41 that was required was to give these freemen right of voting for charitable trusteet 'which was a mind privilege to that which th e y were a ll owe d to exercise of vot ing for Members of that House. This motion would, he thought, give, if agreed to, satisfaction to a large number of persons, and would not interfere with the security of elec tion for charitable trustees, which the Hon. Gentlemen op posite seemed so anxious to effect. Lord J. RUSSELL said that the question of entrusting the power of voting for Members of Parliament to freemen, and giving them the right of electing charitable trustees, stood on totally different grounds. The political rights which were claimed by the freemen they had long enjoyed, and it was considered that there was not sufficient ground for disfranchising them from voting for Members of Parlia ment. But the present proposal was to invest the freemen with rights which they had never before enjoyed, and of which they were not, in his opinion, as good recipients as those which the Bill provided.—(Hear, hear.) It was found by the report of the Commissioners, that the majority of those freemen, indeed generally three-fourths of them, were possessed of scarcely any property at all, and were, in fact, paupers. - Mr. D. W. HARVEY could not understand why it was that the advocates of popular rights should be always so anxious to narrow them. It was not true that the freemen in towns had no interest in the property in ques tion. They had a very great interest in it. The estates which it was now proposed to commit to the charge of the new trustees had been given in the first instance, either annually among the freemen, or made applicable to the edu cation of their children. Here was a very well defined right. For his part he did not think that either the in habitants or the town councils were the proper persons to administer to the trusts. He should much prefer having them under the settled and constant supervision of free and independent parties.—(Hear.) He thought it would be far better and more likely to secure the due administra tion of the funds, if the Bill were allowed to stand over for more mature consideration.--(Hear.) Before sitting down, he could not avoid making one remark upon an ob servation which fell from the Noble Lord. The Noble Lord objected to making the freemen of England the ad miinistrators of the charitable funds of their towns. Why, these same individuals were the very persons whom the Noble Lord had but lately eulogised as the only fitting element through which Members should be returned to Parliament.—(Cheers.) They were abundantly qualified, and quite sufficiently sagacious to perceive who were the fit trustees of the nation's interests ; but the moment they were desirous of being placed in a situation to protect their own property, they became paupers, worthless beings, and the mere refuse of the earth. There was certainly some thing inconsistent in this.—(Cheers.) The Committee then divided, when the numbers were— Ayes Noes Majority against the amendment The clause wag then agreed to. On the fourth clause being read, Sir ROBERT PEEL stated that he entertained a great objection to the provision that the mayor should be ex officio the chairman of the trustees. Mr. WARBURTON was of opinion that when parties were nearly balanced, the majority ought to have the grain of influence which the appointment of the mayor would give them. Sir JAMES GRAHAM observed that if the mayor were to be ex officio the chairman of the trustees, it would not be merely a grain of influence which a majority in a town would possess ; they would in fact exercise a perfect domination. There was no animal in the Zoological Gardens so rare as an impartial mayor. The persons who were elected mayors were almost universally violent political partisans. Dr. BO WRING reprobated the attempts which were continually made by the other side of the House to remove the influence of public opinion from all our institutions. Mr. CHARLTON contended that the clause was con trary to the privileges of the Municipal Bill. Mr. STRUTT and Lord STORMONT each said a few words, the purport of which we were unable to collect. Mr. VERNON SMITH observed that it was not in tended to give the mayor any influence ; because, as chair man, he could not vote at all except when parties were ex actly balanced. It was not to be believed that on such subjects, and in such circumstances, a mayor would allow his political opinions to bias his conduct. He (Mr. Vernon Smith) was, however, not unwilling to abide by the propo sition which he made on a former occasion, namely, that the trustees should at their first meeting elect a chairman ; and that, failing in that, the mayor, as the most prominent person in the town, should be the chairman. Mr. SCARLETT made a few observations, which did not reach the gallery. Sir R. PEEL proposed that the trustees should elect the chairman, and that if they did not do so within a certain time, then the mayor should be the chairman. After some further conversation, we understood that Mr. Vernon Smith's prop..;tion wa s introduced into the clause as an amendment. The clause so amended was then ordered to stand part of the Bill. On clause 12 being read, which provides that if the Town Council neglect to appoint a Chairman within one month after the time specified in the Act, the trustees shall ap point one of themselves to Act as Chairman ; and in the event of their failing to do so, that then the Mayor for the time being shall act as Ch a i rman . Sir R. PEEL objected to the latter part of the clause, and moved that it be omitted. The Committee divided, when the numbers were— For the clause Against it Majority for the clause --23 Mr. SCARLETT moved that a proviso be added to the clause, enacting that no decision or act of the trustees should be valid or have any effect in any matter relating to the sale or exchange of any charitable estate of a real or personal nature, or any change in the management or ad ministration of any such charitable estate, unless notice thereof shall be duly given, at the previous meeting of the trustees to the Secretary, and by him communicated to the trustees assembled at such previous meeting. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL opposed the motion, and said that the Hon. Gentleman had forgotten that the trustees would be subject to the vigilant controul of the Attorney-General in the Court of Chancery, who would no doubt exercise the powers confided to him, if they should be guilty of any improper conduct in the management of the charitable estates. After a few words from Mr. SCARLETT in reply, the Committee divided— Ayes Nees •••• Majority against the motion The remaining clauses and the preamble of the Bill were then agreed to. The House resumed, and the report was ordered to be received on Thursday next. COUNTY ELECTIONS' POLLS BILL. Lord JOHN RUSSELL moved the adjourned debate on the Report of this Bill. The Marquis of CHANDOS wished to ask the Noble Lord how long the poll would be kept open. Lord JOHN RUSSELL—From eight in the morning till five in the afternoon. The Marquis of CHANDOS thought that five in the afternoon was too late for some periods of the year ; it would be dark at that time, and as it was impossible to say at what time of the year an election would take place, it might hap pen that the poll would be open after daylight. He en tertained therefore very strong objections to the poll be ing continued to so late an hour. Mr. HUME said if the Noble Marquis had attended to the evidence given before the Committee up stairs, his fears would have been very much relieved, if not altogether done away with. He believed that practically there would be very little polling after four o'clock. Mr. A. TREVOR objected to the polling of counties being limited to one day. Lord JOHN RUSSELL thought that one day would be sufficient. With respect to the hours, if it was the wish of any party in the House that the polling should be gin at 7 and close at 4, so that an equal number of hours should be given, he should make no objection. He had found by experience that in counties the elections virtually terminated at three o'clock in the afternoon of the first day ; he was therefore quite satisfied that one day would be suf ficient for county elections. After some conversation, the House divided on the question that the report be brought up— For the motion Against it Majority The report was aecordingly brought up. On the amendments being read, The Marquis of C HANDOS moved, as an amendment, that the power of appointing the polling places should be vested in the magistrates at Quarter Sessions, instead of the Secretary of State for the Home Department. After a short conversation, the gallery was cleared for a division, but we understood that none took place. On our return to the gallery, we found the Speaker putting the question that the clause be agreed to. The House then divided— For the clause Against it Majority The clause was then agreed to. The Earl of LINCOLN then moved that the clause be omitted.—The House then divided— For the motion Against it Majority The clause was then agreed to. Sir T. FREMA NILE moved that the provisions of the Bill should not apply to elections taking place between the Ist of November and the Ist of April. The House divided— For the motion Against it Majority The motion was consequently lost. The Report was then agreed to, and the Bill ordered to be engrossed. Upon the question " That the House go into Commit tee on the Inns, Alehouses, and Victualling-houses Bill," Colonel SIBTHORP, after expressing his hostility to the Bill, moved that the House adjourn. The House divided— For the amendment 5 For the motion • . B6 Majority —Bl The House then went into Committee on the Bill, Dr. BO WRING in the Chair. On the 6th clause, Sir A. AGNEW moved, that after the word " situate" at page 4, the following words be struck out of the clause, " after which last-mentioned hour every person so licensed, as aforesaid, shall be at liberty to keep open his house for the remainder of the day, any law to the contrary thereof no t withstanding." Mr. EWART requested the Hon. Gentleman to give him precedence, and allow him to move an amendment on a part of this clause antecedent to the word " situate." Sir A. AGNEW acquiesced in the suggestion. Mr. EWART then made his amendment, the express terms of which we were unable to collect ; but we under stood it to be that such houses should be opened to the public after divine service on Sunday. The Committee divided— For the amendment Against it Majority —l9 Mr. WARBURTON proposed a new clause, for the purpose of subjecting beer-houses, in towns containing 5,000 inhabitants, to the same regulations, in respect to the hours of opening and closing, as those held by the licensed vic tuallers ; but at the suggestion of the Chancellor of the Exchequer the Hon. Member consented to withdraw the clause for the present with the intention of bringing it up on the Report. A new clause was, on the motion of Mr. WARBUR TON, added to the Bill, giving magistrates power to mi tigate penalties. The remaining clauses of the Bill were then agreed to, and the House resumed. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER ob tained leave to bring in a Bill for suspending appointments to certain dignities and offices in cathedral and collegiate churches, and to sinecure rectories. The other Orders of the Day were then disposed of, and the House adjourned at a quarter-past Two. NOTES ON NOVELTIES. GEORGE ROBINS AND THE NAPOLEON RELICS. Mr. Robins has at length found a subject and a sale suited to his genius. He has had a special retainer. The Napoleon treasures possessed by the late Mr. Barry O'Meara, and of fered for sale at his residence in the Edgeware-road a few days since, were " items" such as do not fall under an auctioneer's hammer every day ; and Mr. R. instead of wasting his sweet ness on the desert furniture of Smiths and Joneses infinite, has been summoned to the forum to deliver an oration in honour of silver spoons, that might have inspired Cicero, and of ditto forks, that might have tickled the soul of Demosthenes. The ear of imagination even now catches the sound of his hammer as the illustrious lots are one after another knocked down. A Turkish sabre with a real Damascus blade, worn by Napoleon in Egypt, was purchased at 15/. 15s. An exquisitely finished portrait of Napoleon, by Abbe Lassaues, drawn early in life, seventeen guineas. A carved full-length ivory miniature of Napoleon sold at seven guineas. Of the plate used by Napo leon, a gravy spoon was purchased by Mr. Potter, M. P., for six guineas; five forks were also obtained by Mr. Potter at 31. each ; six tea spoons brought one guinea and a half each (the intrinsic value was about five shillings each.) A few lines of Napoleon's hand-writing, a confidential communication from Napoleon to the Prince Eugene, was bought for eleven guineas. A small quantity of Napoleon's hair, its colonr light auburn, of a most silky texture, was sold for 21. lOs. The magnificent gold coronation medal, representing Napoleon and Marie Louise before the altar on one side, and profiles on the other, for fifteen guineas, &c. But of far greater importance than all—even than the Queen Anne's farthing, once the property of Lady Leigh's family, which sold for four guineas —was the it may indeed be called the bone of contention—the tooth of Napoleon • It is thus referred t o i n the n arra ti ve o f t hi s me morable sale. "It was under a glass cover and seemed not to be much decayed. It was one of the three teeth extracted by Mr. O'Meara at St. Helena; one of which was sent to his mo ther, another to his brother, and the third was given to his friend." The learned Intrinsicator of Property dwelt much on the value of this relic. "It might be said, what use could be made of it ; but he could tell the ladies that teeth in France were often made into rings, and he wanted to know what price could properly purchase a ring adorned by Napoleon's tooth." It was put up at a guinea, and knocked down to a Mr. Met calf at seven guineas and a half. The instrument with which it was extracted was next put up, and purchased by the same gentleman at three guineas. On selling this instrument Mr. Robins observed, his friend Cartwright was at present unap proachable as a dentist; but he doubted if a man of great talent became possessed of this instrument, and took from Napoleon the famed tooth, what might be the result. Some of the com mentators upon this event insinuate that the relics " fetched high prices !" History may record otherwise. No, the prices were low, when contrasted with such high encomiums. It must have been worth seven guineas and a half, not to possess one of Napoleon's teeth, but only to see Mr. Robins display his, while expatiating upon Napoleon's greatness—" decidedly the greatest man the world ever saw." " But," continued Mr. R., " now he is dead, and gone to a place where I sincerely hope he is happy .f" We sincerely hope so to, though we are not made acquainted with the name of the place, and probably a good deal depends upon that. It is gratifying to see one great man thus stepping forth to pay homage to another. The Viscount de Chateaubriand, in his just published work, remarks upon this subject, observing how Shakspeare was appreciated by Milton, how Camoens was admired by Tasso, and how Mi chael Angelo sympathised with Dante. Could he, by antici pation, have beard this eulogium, he would have crowned the catalogue with a note of exultation that Napolean has been ap preciated by Robins. And doubtless we shall live (if we are lucky) to see these names linked together, and to behold it recorded as the result of this sale, that Napoleon the Grand was emperor of France and Italy, and that Mr. Robins was the auctioneer who disposed of his gravy spoon to the highest bidder. It will be better perhaps that History should content herself with this simple declaration ; for it might sound incon sistent with the character of true devotion and reverence to the Emperor to say (what it must be owned is the actual truth' that Mr. Robins made Napoleon's hair go off rapidly, and af: terwards knocked down one of his teeth !—Court Journal. RAILWAY.—Twenty miles of the Carlisle and Newcastle Railway were opened last Tuesday. The cere mony observed upon this occasion excited great local interest. The Carlisle Journal states that " all the shops in the city were closed, and the day was kept as a general holiday amongst all classes. Flags were displayed from several houses, where the different trades had appointed to meet. Bands of music, one belonging to Carlisle, and which had been engaged by the Corporation—another from Newcastle, dressed in uniform— and a third from Allendale Town Head—began to play upon the streets at an early hour, at each intermission of the rain." On the day of opening, no great speed was attempted—the utmost of the velocity rarely exceeding the rate of 16 miles an hour. The engines, however, though not intended for speed, are capable of much greater things, and since Tuesday have generally performed the journey from Greenhead to the station at Carlisle, a distance of 20 miles, in an hour and ten minutes, including all stoppages. The day was, fortunately, darkened by no accident or calamity. ENCOURAGING SIGNS OF THE TlMES.—There are forcibly apparent at the present period, a few striking and important facts which, indicative as they are of the state of the empire, should not escape universal attention. Nor will, we trust, the conviction fail to be entertained, that as the condition of the people is a correct index of the power and efficiency of government, the present administration is enti tled to the gratitude of the country. From every part of the manufacturing and commercial districts, the accounts are highly gratifying. In every branch there is ample employ ment for all - and the rate of wa ges is increasing—circum stances, which must prove of great benefit to the agricultural portions of the community 'arising from an increasing con sumption—to that important class which, employed in the cul tivation of the land, has long suffered under a state of depres sion, but which, assisted by the operations of the poor law unions, is, we hope, rising to participate in the general benefit. Crime, too, is evidently upon the decrease. The Irish judges congratulating the respective juries upon the fact of its dimi nution is more striking. Without alluding to the more southern provinces, the calendar for Yorkshire, considering the im mense district which it embraces, is also small, and the offen ces are not of a deep and serious character. In the extremely populous district of Durham the calendar is very light. At Appleby there is not a single case. In short, the calendars throughout the whole of the circuit, are extremely light. Here are abundant grounds for congratulation and thankful ness. Nor is this all. The present gratifying state of pros perity is not based on a false and fictitious foundation. It is as a tree whose roots are firmly fixed in the heart of the soil, and whose branches overspread the whole land. Amidst this gra tifying state the arts and sciences are extending their sphere of usefulness ; and literature is presenting additional attrac tions and delights. Public improvements were never carried on in a scale so magnificent as is the case at the present pe riod ; and to crown all there is every prospect of a bountiful harvest.—Sunderland Herald. THE TEA TRADE, MONDAY.—The deliveries last week were 581,7501b5. The trade is rather more brisk. The total supplies this season from China will be nearly 12,000,0001b5. The exports to America from Canton would be about 10,000,0001b5. A NEW NosE.---The Talicotian operation was re cently performed by Mr. Douglas, of Glasgow. The case went on favourably, and in three weeks the strength of the transplanted nose was such, that the patient could take hold of it and blow it. The forehead was brought to heal like any other wound, and now, seven weeks after the operation, the patient is perfectly well, and exceedingly grateful for the im provement that has been effected in her appearance. SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNAL After the explicit declaration of Viscount bourne, that he would have no more to do with the Irish Church Bill, if once the shears of the Tory ex- Chancellor were to lop off all that made the measure valuable or even tolerable, the solemn pomposity with which the Noble and Learned Baron last night asked the Premier if he would consent to fix Thursday next for the third reading, was really ludicrous. The Prime Minister, of course, consented to the proposed arrange ment ; for why should he obstruct the Destructive Peers in the completion of their tragic farce ? Thurs day next is accordingly fixed for the performance of this (as far as the Irish Tithe Bill is concerned) last act, in the present session, of Tory folly and Lordly mischief. We notice this circumstance solely for the purpose of placing prominently before the coup' try, and more especially the Liberal Members of the House of Commons, the fact that on Thursday , the 28th instant, the Irish Church Bill, as mangled and deprived of that essence which made it palateable to the empire, will be read for the last time and passed in the House of Lords. That evening or the next the mutilated remains will be returned to the House of Commons. The cons id era ti on o f t h e c h anges an d " amendments" by the Commons must consequently take place on the early day in the first week of August. It therefore behoves the Reformers who have seats in the Lower House to be at their post on Monday next. Those Members who are now ab sent have not a moment for loitering at home or tarry" ing on the way. That all pretexts for absence may be taken away—that there may be no room hereafter for scheming excuses of any sort, we will repeat the import' ant declaration of the Prime Minister on Monday nig ht. `6 TO THE PRINCIPLE OF APPROPRIATION," said Lord MELBOURNE, " I AM PLEDGED, AND TQ IT I AM DETER' MINED TO ADHERE. The instant 1 F Xlzd that I have 70 1 the support of the other House of Parliament and o f the country upon that principle, THAT INSTANT I WILL RESIGN THE OFFICE I HOLD, an d I amsure, , shall be supported in that course by my colleagues." It now remains for the Liberal Members of the House of Commons to do their duty—to fulfil their promises, and redeem their solemn pledges at the hustings. Every Reformer, every man who wishes to maintain 0 Liberal Government in these United Kingdoms—every man, in short, who is really opposed to the restoration of a Tory Cabinet, which would treat the people Of Ireland as " aliens in character, in country, and i° creed," and the people of England as slaves—ever): man of this stamp will, no matter by what sacrifice ( 0 private interest or personal inconvenience, be in his place in the House of Commons on Monday nest. Traitors alone will be absent on that occasion! Morning Chronicle. It is often amusing, if not instructive, to read the lucubrations of the Herald. The deep erudition-" the profound knowledge—the varied and extensive formation de omnibus existentibus et non existentibus —and the exquisite critical acumen daily displayed by our amiable Contemporary, are really marvellous' What can surpass the piquancy, for instance, of tb e , following elab ora t e cr iti que u p on Mr. O'Connell's third letter to the people of Great Britain ? " Some of our Contemporaries profess to discover great skill in the attempt to try the question of Ireland upon, the merits of a particular case. It seems that Homer the same thing. But as Homer wrote poetry, and Mr ' O'Connell wri t es p o liti cs , an d pro f esses to address h i ms e l f to the understanding, we cannot admit that the authority even of so great an original is precisely the one h e ought to have consulted." Well done, grandmamma I "It seems that Homer did the same thing," i. e., attempted " to try the pies:, tion of Ireland upon the merits of a' particular case. What say ye to this, Messrs. the Annotators ? Th e bibliopolists cannot, surely, let slip so fine an o pportiv pity for swelling the mob of " varzce lectiones." W e likened Mr. O'Connell's mode of exposing the abuse s of the Established Church to Sterne's plan of exposing the abuses of tyranny ; but the gentle dowager of Shoe: lane would strip th e sent i menta l j ourna li st of the mer of the inventio n , an d d u b hi m a mere p l ag i ar i st. poli' ticians and the literati must feel obliged for this " peg light," by which the former perceive that Homer ,fir.v . " tried the questi on o f I re l an d upon t h e mer i ts o f P particular case ; " an d th e l atter , t h at " H o mer wrote poetry ;" and first, endeavoured to show th e nature of liberty, by taking a single captive, and pur suing him through the detail of his sufferings." This wonderful discovery completely falsifies the old saying' that " there is nothing new under the sun." Th e Herald has an old reputation for happy classical sion. We remember a very elaborate leading a rticle I° our Contemporary in which the authority of Horner , Julius Caes a r, Ci cero , an d ot h er old Grecians _.„‘va'" appealed to as d ec i s i ve o f a part i cu l ar question. 1-I°' mer still maintains his post, we see.---Morn. Citron' The admirable and unanswerable speech of 1 ,014 Lyndhurst in the debate on the Irish Tithe Bill last Monday even i ng wou ld , i n the minds of all reasonabi.e men, have settled the question on the soundest prinel: pies of p o li cy , an d on t h e truest elements of arithinetf, cal calc u l a ti on , h a d t h e nature of it not been alreaal, made ma n if es t b y t h e k nown v i ews of the Melbourne Ministers, and the necessities of their degraded 1 309 . 1 ; tion. Lord Lyndhurst, retracing the history of tT e Church - question, referred to the time at which t" j " fatal resolution" for plundering the Irish clergy b a it first been passed by the House of Commons, and are f from the different circumstances of that period and the present a conclusive argument why Lord Nl e bourne should n ow f ee l hi mse lf b ound, as 90 upright statesman, to abandon that ill-omened re' solution. It was most correctly stated by To e ie Lyndhurst, th a t, w h en t h e appropriation prinniPb was first carried, the real condition of the Chu/e of Ireland was "totally misunderstood." The influ x ence of repeated and obstinate mi sca l cu l at i ons as to tr number of Irish Protestants, and the amount of S e ' siastical income, still prevailed in many quarter s ; nos having been yet cor rec t e d b y the reports of tb , r , Commissioners of Chur c h R evenue, or by- inte" / gence from any well-informed source. Among the se not very trustworthy ca l cu l ators who were cha r gea ble with the production, whether deliberate or o th e rwis e ' of much gross an d pern i c i ous error, was Dr. Dorei who reckon e d th e revenues of the Church at sev er millions, and th e P rotestant population at 260, 0 0 souls I There was a l so M r. J oseph Hume, who s its for years upon the plainest sum in addition or subtraee' tion, and never fails to bring out an addled result. the truth-telling Joseph, so late as the year 1834, Il e it down as the f ru it o f " prec i se i nqu i ry and acct s' calculation," th a t the revenues of the Irish Chute' , amounted to 3,200,0001. It will be remembered tut notwithstandi ng suc h p reva l ent i mpress i ons, L or d Al i thorp and his colleagues, forming the majority of ti le present Cabinet, did nevertheless in that same ye w and in the teeth of the Middlesex man of fi g ures, re e' ' fuse to san c ti on th e appropriation principle, on th ground that C omm i ss i oners o f I nquiry h ad been °I; pointed, and th a t it wou ld b e a l toget h er i ncons i s te to anticipate and in a manner supersede their report 1) 4 adopting a c on j ec t ura l, h owever pro b able, b as i s Church legislation. This course was coldlylooked •• at the time by many friends of Church and State s : e independent supporters of the Ministry, and, if se mistake n o t, b y surse l ves among t h e number, beoa u fwe were, in common w ith ot h ers , d ece i ved comp let el s as to the amount of the clerical revenues, and confid es that after pr ov idi ng f or a ll th e essent i a l wants of tb .: Church, there would remain a real, natural, and e' tensive surplus. We were governed also by a fur th o et consideration—namely, that the Administration 11 . lr composed of English Whig gentlemen—that tli,eey supporters were English Whi gs — t h at toget h er ti` formed an actual majority o f th e House of Couull °o o , —that they were friends o f th e constitutional loi, narchy—that O'Connell w as th e i r no i sy, v i rulen t, ro of corous, indefatigable foe—that whatever correction s sirs the Irish Church syst em were appl i ed, or rant enacted, would be admi n i s t ere d an d worked in a si,lb of tenderness towards th e Ch urc h , and of good PyVe and protection towards the Protestant community. 1 ,, were then, as w e now are, cordial advocates for the " ef plication of a rea l surp l us of revenue, from whale l 4 1 source derived, and when placed at the disr; e r )11, , 7;a+ of a loyal and reputable Government, to w 13 30 01 objects of national benefit the bgislature 60 0 think proper to prefer. But to an approloi a clause—framed for no earthly purpose say; t he cloak an d countenance t h e i ndef i nite robbery ° the Church, after its resources have proved, 0 11 t i v g showi ng o f th ose w h ose i nterest lay in exaggera •